121 



sanitation control are adequate to protect the public and the utilization of this 

 resource. Their application and enforcement should be continued. 



With the exception of further control of the discharge of floatable materials and 

 their associated sewage microorganisms, there is no basis for alterations of pres- 

 ent southern California waste discharge practice for reasons of bacterial and 

 viral infection or hazard or resource damage. 



Mexican practice of sewage discharge should receive further study. 



(e) Trace Elements. — There is no substantive evidence that would support 

 major changes in present wastewater processing and discharge practice for rea- 

 sons of its trace element content. Nevertheless, improved control of the discharge 

 of highly toxic metals is a prudent and meaningful step in wastewater manage- 

 ment. 



Inputs of trace elements from direct industrial discharge, ship antifouling treat- 

 ment, dredge spoil, runoff, aerial fallout, advection and other sources should be 

 better quantified. 



(/) Trace Organic^ and Pesticides. — There is ample evidence to require the 

 elimination of chlorinated hydrocarbons and other persistent organics from 

 wastewater to lowest practical attainable levels. Strict control at the source is 

 .strongly recommended. 



The thoughtful monitoring of effluents and the organisms of southern Cali- 

 fornia for chlorinatetl organic material, other halogenated compounds and other 

 organics is essential, and presently unsuspected substances must be considered 

 in an active program. 



{g) Summary. — 1. The application of inland wastewater di.sposal policies 

 and practices to marine waste disposal, .such as in the Southern California Bight, 

 is technically unsound. For example, t.vpical inland requirements for removals of 

 biochemical oxygen demand, suspended solids, and nutrients from municipal 

 wastewaters have little technical justification or relevance to marine ecological 

 problems. 



2. To the best of our knowledge, no potential effects other than those indicated 

 herein will require major investigation. 



3. Similarly, no substantial modification of present wa.stewater disposal prac- 

 tices, other than tho.se recommended herein, is justified at present. However, the 

 investigations of the si)ecific i)roblem areas as recommended may indicate the 

 desirability of future additional modifications in wastewater disposal practice. 



4. Routine monitoring and competent investigations of specific problems should 

 continue, to determine man's general effects (including those of wastewater 

 discharges) on the environment of the Southern California Bight. 



Those interested in the detailed findings of this investigation are referred to 

 the entire report including its 120 si>ecific findings and the full Chapter 12 on 

 Conclusions and Recommendations. 



HAZARDS OF COMPLETE BANS ON BLANKET KEQUIBEMENTS 



It appears popular today to yield to the clarion call for "no waste discharge." 

 It is not exactly clear what such terminology means b\it it appears likely that 

 such a goal will not be attained as long as man inhabits the earth. Nonetheless, 

 the prime objective of waste management should be to limit the discharge of 

 waste materials so that the minimum adverse ecological effects occur ; and, 

 wherever possible, the system design should produce beneficial environmental 

 effects. All too often the latter has been neglected as a real possibility. It must 

 be recognized that decisions taken to ban the disposal of waste material to a 

 particular sink, such as the ocean, generally results in the transfer of the waste, 

 possibly with a change in character, to one of the two remaining ultimate sinks — 

 to the land or to the atmosphere. ' 



Let us examine briefly the likely impact of a complete ban on the discharge 

 of digested sludge (treatment process underflow) to all water bodies including 

 the ocean. A ban on the disposal of sludge to inland rivers and lakes used for 

 domestic water supply appears to be sound and logical. However, the extension 

 of such a policy to the oceans does not appear to be logical. Many of those 

 advocating the ban on digested sludge disposal to the ocean advocate strongly 

 the recovery of .such materials for application to agricultural land as a soil 

 conditioner. This is done to make u.se of the humus and nutrient content of the 

 digested sludge. Yet. one of the major objections to ocean disposal of such 

 materials is the trace toxic substance content (largely trace metals) of the 

 sludge, and the entrance and iK)ssible concentration of these materials in the 

 food chain of the ocean. If this is a legitimate concern about ocean disposal 



